"The Chairman: You might be seated, Colonel.
Mr. McCloy: Just as truthful seated as standing."
(Warren Commissioners to Colonel Finck)
According to the JFK autopsy report:
"Situated in the posterior scalp approximately 2.5 cm. laterally to the right and slightly above the external occipital protuberance is a lacerated wound measuring 15 x 6 mm. In the underlying bone is a corresponding wound through the skull which exhibits beveling of the margins of the bone when viewed from the inner aspect of the skull."
This was reported as the 'entry wound' of the fatal head-shot bullet.
Both the 1968 Clark Panel & the later HSCA investigations, rather surprisingly,
concluded that this 'entry wound' very near the external occipital protuberance (eop) did not exist.
" [The] wound is located considerably above [10 cms above] the occipital protuberance, slightly to the right of the midline........ " (HSCA FPP Report)
"The panel was concerned about the apparent disparity between the localization of the wound in the photographs and X-rays and in the autopsy report, and sought to clarify this discrepancy by interviewing the three pathologists, Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck, and the radiologist, Dr. Ebersole. " (HSCA FPP Report)
Thus the autopsists (according to both of the subsequent panels) found an 'entry wound' where there was in fact
no entry wound whatever.
Without going into to the technical arguments either panel used to reach this conclusion, I thought it might be
interesting to examine the testimony of all the other participants present at the JFK autopsy, to see how widespread
knowledge of this (supposed) major find - the entry point for the bullet that killed JFK - had actually been at
the autopsy itself.
If a large percentage of those present were actually aware of such a find, we could at least argue this as evidence
that Drs. Humes, Boswell & Finck (the autopsists) had found something there they considered of major significance,
at the eop. On the other hand, if the general awareness of this 'major find' should turn out to have been minimal,
we can say that in all probability, whatever they found 'at or near the eop' on the night of 22/11/63 was perhaps
not seen as highly significant at the time. (To illustrate the point, knowledge of JFK's back wound, a similar
small entry wound, appears to be almost universal.)
Interestingly, the only support for the 'eop entry' - aside from the support to be expected, from those who wrote
the autopsy report - comes from a mere two bystanders. Both provide support for the notion that there was
a scalp wound of some kind found not at the eop but very near the rear hairline, some 2" or so below
the eop. Neither provide appear to support for the discovery of any 'corresponding' wound in the skull itself,
beneath this wound.
David Osborne's statements to David Lifton are very revealing:
"Couldn't see the entry," be replied. "That tissue was all pretty much blown away. . . ." (Lifton, "Best Evidence", pbk,656-657)
See also Richard Lipsey .
"I feel that there was no really entrance wound --maybe I said that --in the rear of his head. There was a point where they determined the bullet entered the back of his head but I believe all of that part of his head was blown. I mean I think it just physically blew away that part of his head. You know, just like a strip right across there or may have been just in that area -- just blew it out..
Q: So you say the damage caused by the entrance and the exit of the bullet to the head caused one large hole?
LIPSEY: To the best of my recollection, yes it did."
My personal conclusions are that:
1). A lacerated, tangential scalp wound was found some 2" below the eop.
2). Some possible sign of a bullet wound was found in the skull 2" or so higher, a little above the eop. This consisted of an apparently 'inward bevelled' edge of broken skull, possibly somewhat suggestive of a (partial) bullet entry.Dr. PETTY. And, you say, Dr. Boswell, that the bullet entered the skin and
that the wound in the skull was a little above that.? [Two inches ??? !!!]
Dr. BOWELL. Right.
Dr. PETTY. Because apparently the bullet had tunneled a little under the
skin and then that corresponds with the diagram that I saw which showed a
point on the back of the body, the diagram with an arrow pointing upward and
slightly to the left.
(HSCA FPP interview of Humes & Boswell. The 'upwards and leftwards' pointing
arrow is there for all to see on Boswell's autopsy diagram.)3). At some time between the end of the autopsy proper and the delivery of the report on Sunday 24th November, the autopsists began to reconsider this 'scalp laceration' & this 'bevelled edge' in the context of the need for absolute proof of a gunman behind JFK, and (possibly) also in the light of the death of Lee Oswald, on 24th Nov, which, of course, meant there would never be a trial, and the likelihood of any cross examination on the subject decreased.
I should say that I fully accept the HSCA determinations of a bullet entry at or very near the 'cowlick', some
4" above the eop, and of a fatal shot coming from behind & above JFK. The explicit argument for this is
too lengthy to go into here.
The results of the autopsy witness survey appear below.
There are 32 witnesses mentioned here. I do not claim the list is neccessarily exhaustive, but it includes all
the participants I could discover.
All were present at the 22/11/63 JFK autopsy, most throughout, some for shorter periods. Of these 32, 11 provide
no useful information one way or the other, leaving 21 who do.
Of this 21, 16 provide statements that suggest there was in fact no entry wound
to the head found at the autopsy proper. That's 76%.
Only 5 suggest there was. They are the 3 autopsists, who disagree amongst themselves on the nature of this supposed
wound, plus Roy Kellerman & John Stringer.
Of these 5, a full 100% claim the entry wound in the rear scalp was actually a little (a couple of cm) above the
rear hairline, some 2" below
the eop. On this, then, there is a surprising (and very interesting) unanimity.
Since writing this I have come across an article by Millicent Cranor who also seems to have notice the preponderence of 'hairline' testimony. See : THE THIRD WOUND By Milicent Cranor [1998 issue of Kennedy Assassination Chronicles (Volume 4, Issue 3)] "This report is about a constellation of statements suggesting the possibility of an unacknowledged third wound in John Kennedy’s body, high in the back of the neck (or very low in the skull) - within the hairline."
Of course, this is no 'third wound'. This is part one of the 'first wound'. The (supposed) eop entry in the scalp, nowhere near the eop.
(One of the corpsmen assisting in the morgue)
He knew nothing & heard nothing of any entry wound to the head being
found :
A :" Like I said, no definition showing entry or exit at all. It was like a
bomb went off in his head.."
Q: Because if you're saying there's no way to see the coning effect to know
that's where the entry or exit was.."
A: "Right. There was nothing like that at all "
Q "No coning?"
A :"No coning at all"
( Interview, Livingstone, HT2 p265)Regarding the wound in the head, O'Connor
said there was 'I.. .no use me opening the skull because
there were no brains." O‘Connor described the defect
as being in the region from the "...Occiptal around the temporal and parietal regions." He said there was
a massive hole, no little hole."
"Regarding commission exhibit 386, [ above ] O'Connor said
it did “ ..,not reflect what I saw. The little head
hole was not there."
(HSCA interview)
According to Joe Hagen, Tom Robinson performed the 3 or so hour long
reconstruction of JFK's head. ("He said Tom Robinson performed most of the
repairs to the head")
They both worked for Gawler's Funeral Home, who were the morticians called
in to handle the job.
He saw nothing of any small entry wound to the head :
Robinson's drawing for the ARRB.
Purdy: Were there any other wounds on the head other than the little one in
the right temple area, and the big one in the back?
Robinson: That's all
Purdy: Do you think it was possible that there was some other wound under
the hair? Did you look for other wounds?
Robinson: Oh, yes we would have found that.
Purdy: So you are satisfied in your professional experience that there were
no other significant wound of the head?
Robinson: I stayed on the left side of the body through out the whole thing.
[presumably implying he wouldn't have missed anything]
(hsca interview)
(Was one of the FBI agents assigned to the morgue)
James Sibert knew nothing & heard nothing of any entry wound to the head being
found :
Q :So, now. the question is realIy no more complicated than did you hear the
doctors discusswhere the bullet wound - or where the bullet entered the back
of the head?
A: The specific place where it entered?
Q: Yes.
A: I don't recall that. Just that general statement.
Q: So, they said it entered the back of thehead.
A: Yes
Q: But nothing more specific.
A: Correct.
Q: Did they ever attempt, or did you hear any discussion about attempting to
measure the size of the entry wound?
A: No.
Q: Did you ever hear any discussion aboutbeveling of the skull? Sound
familiar?
A: No.
Q: Did you hear any discussion about the estimated size of the bullet that
struck the head?
A: No.
(sibert, arrb)" He recalls getting the measurements
of the back wound and the skull bone but has no recollection
of writing down the location of the entrance-wound.in
the President's head" (SIBERT, HSCA staff interview, August 29, 1977)
Jan Rudnicki was lab assistant to Boswell.
He knew nothing & heard nothing of any entry wound to the head being found :
"He did not recall any entry wound in the back of the head . was asked
if he personally has a chance to examine the wounds..he said yes he was
working with Boswell" (Interview, Livingstone, HT2 p203.)
Floyd Reibe was a student of medical photography at the time of the autopsy.
He
worked with John Stringer, the autopsy photographer :
" Riebe recalled seeing one wound in the lower neck near the front of the
body and one very large wound located around the rear of the head near the
top. He could not recall any other wounds. " (30/4/78 interview,
hsca)
(Was one of the FBI agents assigned to the morgue)
Q: Did the doctors describe, for example, the size of what they perceived to
be the entrance wound? So, would they identify that with a certain number of
centimeters or millimeters?
A: If it's in my report, then, I do recall it ....
Q: Do you remember their making any kind ofstatement about the-exactly where
the locationwas, in terms of millimeters or centimeters?
A: The head wound?
Q: Yes.
A: If they-if they did make a statement to that effect, I would have put
that in the report.
Q: Okay.
A: Or Jim [Sibert] would have.....
(O'Neill, ARRB)
[there are no such measurements in the Sibert &O'Neill Report]
.
On the scalp entry, he supposes the scalp at the point of entry was
_missing_ entirely, which would mean he didn't see and 6 by 15 mm entry
wound :
"I guess, the place where it went in would not be there, as far as the scalp
was concerned. " (arrb)
He produced a diagram for the HSCA with an 'entry' marked.
This would (in view of the above) have to be on the basis of the
determination from the x-rays that the bullet had entered the rear of the
skull. Not from any bullet hole in the scalp, or measured location in the
skull.
James Jenkins acted as Boswell's assistant throughout the autopsy.
He knew nothing & heard nothing of any entry wound to the head being
found :
"One of the things I don't understand is they talk of bevelling of the
wounds in the skull .
I don't remember the skull being that closely examined..I could hear what
they were saying & I remember no discussions about missile wounds beveled
in or bevelled out . That would be something I would remember"
(Interview, Livingstone, HT2 p 243)
"Regarding CE 386 (Volume 16, page 977), [above] Jenkins
said the wound at the top part of the head looked familiar
but said he had no recollection of the little bullet hole
in the head. "(HSCA interview)
"Jenkins does not recall a small hole in the
head as drawn on the descriptive sheet; he said that the
big hole would have covered the area where the little hole
was drawn on the sheet. " (HSCA interview)
Bill Greer was the driver of the limo in Dallas & was present at the
autopsy.
He knew nothing & heard nothing of any entry wound to the head being
found :
Mr. Specter. Now, aside from that opening which you have described and you
have indicated a circle with a diameter of approximately 5 inches, would you
say that is about what you have indicated there?
Mr. Greer. Approximately I would say 5 inches; yes.
Mr. Specter. Did you observe any other opening or hole of any sort in the
head itself?
Mr. Greer. No, sir; I didn't. No other one .
Mr. Specter. Specifically did you observe a hole which would be below the
large area of skull which was absent? [ie the supposed eop 'entry']
Mr. Greer. No, sir; I didn't .
(Greer, WC)
John Ebersole was the radiologist at the autopsy.
To judge by the following he knew nothing & heard nothing of any entry wound
to the head being
found :
" Dr. Baden. Do you on examination of these films
opinion as to where the gunshot wound of entrance was
head radiologically?
Dr. Ebersole. In my opinion it would have come from the
side and the basis of the films. I guess that is all that
can be said about the films at this time." (FPP interview)
.... hardly consistent with him believing they had in reality found an _eop_
entry.
He does not dispute that the x-rays are those he took
James Metzler was a hospital corpsman, 3rd class. He was in the morgue for
about 10 minutes, & saw the coffin opened.
He '...thought [jfk] was shot in the head from the front'
(lifton pp633)
..which rules out Metzler as seeing or believing in any eop entry.
He's mentioned here for completeness, not because because his testimony is
of any great value on this particular question.
(Chief Petty Officer in charge of thepathology Department at Bethesda Naval Hospital in November
1963.)
"Concerning the wounds of President Kennedy, Mr. Boyers stated that there
was a large wound to the right side and towards the rear of the head. Another
wound was located in the upperback just under the scapula." (hsca int)
Again, no trace of an eop 'entry'.
(Hagen worked with the morticians)
No mention of any such wound. (arrb interview)
(Stringer was the autopsy photographer)
John Stringer appears as another 'hairline' 'eop' entry witness :
Q: That's going to be my next question for you. Are you able to identify the
hole that the
doctors identified on the night of the autopsy as being the entrance wound
in the skull?
A: I think this was a piece of bone, but it was down near there - right
about in there.
Q: You're referring to what appears to be a piece of matter or something -
A: Yes.
Q: - that is near the hairline?
A: Mm-hmm. But it was near there.
Q: And you're certain that that's where the doctors identified the entrance
wound as being; is that correct?
A: Yeah. Yeah, I would think so. That's I what I remember. (ARRB)
An entry in the rear hairline would have been 2" or so _below_ the eop.
Like _all_ the other 4 witnesses (Humes , Boswell, Finck, Kellerman) who
claim to have seen a small 'entry' into the scalp, Stringer puts it in the
rear hairline.
" Q: Do you know what that red spot is that appears to be, in layman's terms, near the cowlick?
A: It looks like blood. I would say it was. There was blood all over the place. But I don't think it was anything out of the ordinary. I don't think there was a hole there for the bullet wound. You would have seen the hole." (ARRB)
(Kellerman was a Secret Service Agent. He was in the front of the limo in which JFK was shot)
Roy Kellerman, like ALL (repeat ALL) of a grand total of 5 witnesses who say
there was any kind of
'eop-ish' entry into the scalp found (HB&F + Kellerman + Stringer) says it
was in the rear
hairline, which would put it a couple of inches beneath the eop.
The convergence of opinion that the small 'lacerated' scalp wound (such as
it was) was actually in or very near the rear hairline (100% agreement by
all witnesses who claim to have seen it) is very suggestive.
Of course it should be noted that the 'entry' into the scalp was not
neccessarily in the same location as the 'entry' into the skull, as Boswell
actually (surprisingly) admits.
Here's Kellerman :
Mr. Kellerman: Entry into this man's head was right below that wound, right
here.
Mr. Specter. Indicating the bottom of the hairline immediately to the
right
of the ear about the lower third of the ear?
Mr. Kellerman. Right. But it was in the hairline, sir .
Mr. Specter. In his hairline?
Mr. Kellerman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Specter. Near the end of his hairline?
Mr. Kellerman. Yes, sir .
(Kellerman, WC)
However:
"Kellerman does .....only recalls one large hole in the head and no small
holes in the head."
(Kellerman, HSCA interview)
By 'hole in the head' Kellerman may mean 'hole in the skull' . His diagram
for the HSCA does show a 'little hole beneath a big hole'. [above] The only way
his words & his diagram can both be true is if the latter referred to the
scalp & the former to the skull.
This would be compatible with his WC testimony also.
(Humes was one of the autopsy pathologists)
James Humes identifies a scalp wound in the rear hairline as 'the eop entry' :
Dr. PETTY. Can I go back to another interpretation which is very important
to this committee? I don't really mean to belabor the point, but we need to
be certain, as certain as we can be-and I'm showing you now photograph No.
15,and here, to put it in the record, is the posterior hairline or margin of
the hair of the late President, and there, near the midline, and just a
centimeter or two above the hairline , is an area that you refer to as the
inshoot wound ?
Dr. HUMES. Yes, sir.
(fpp interview)
(Boswell was one of the autopsy pathologists)
Boswell thinks the rear scalp 'entry' wound was very near the rear hairline,
as do all the other four witnesses who say they saw it.
This puts it a couple of inches below the eop.
"I'm talking like a couple of centimeters above the hairline and 4
centimeters to the left of the ear"
(arrb)
Dr. PETTY. And, you say, Dr. Boswell, that the bullet entered the skin and
that the wound in the skull was a little above that.? [Two inches ??? !!!]
Dr. BOWELL. Right.
Dr. PETTY. Because apparently the bullet had tunneled a little under the
skin and then that corresponds with the diagram that I saw which showed a
point on the back of the body, the diagram with an arrow pointing upward and
slightly to the left.
(HSCA FPP interview of Humes & Boswell.)"Regarding the head wound, DR. BOSWELL said the wound was fairly low in the back of the head and that the bone was completely gone above the entry wound. He said that during the autopsy, a
piece of skull fragment was brought in which included a portion which corresponded to the missing half of the entry wound in the head" (HSCA interview Purdy, Aug 17, 1977).
(Finck was one of the autopsy pathologists)
Finck too (along with Humes, Boswell, Stringer & Kellerman, the only other
people in creation to have claimed to have seen it or heard a word about it)
believes the _scalp_ 'entry' was way down 'by the hairline'.
This would put the scalp 'entry' about 2" below the eop :
Dr. Petty. Which one are you pointing to?
Dr. Finck. The wound of entry.
Dr. Petty. And that is near the hairline or that is up toward the upper
portion of the ear?
Dr. Finck. The best I can do for the wound of entry in the back of the head.
Dr. Wecht. She still does not have anything to show which you are referring
to. Describe it so the stenographer can get it down.
Dr. Finck. In the lower half of the photograph.Would that be good enough
identification for the record?
Dr. Petty.This is the one by the hairline.
Dr. Wecht. By the hairline.
(Finck, HSCA fpp)"I also noticed another scalp wound, possibly [ note only 'possibly'] of entrance, in the right occipital
region, lacerated and transversal [see note below] 15 x 6 mm.Corresponding to that wound, the skull shows a portion of a crater, the beveling of which is obvious on the internal aspect of the bone" (1 February 1965 letter to Gen Blumberg).
note: . The handwritten original autopsy report describes the wound as 'tangential to the surface of the scalp'. This was cut from the final revision. Boswell's autopsy drawing similarly calls it 'ragged, slanting'.
Lipsey stated that he was an aide to General Wehlewho was the Commanding General of the Military District ofWashington; U.S. Army. This office was responsible:for allthe funeral arrangements of JFK. Lipsey said that he witnessedthe majority of the autopsy.
"We next asked Lipsey to recap his discription ofthe wounds. He described these. as follows:(1) one bullet entered the back of the headand exited resulting in part of the face andhead being blown away;(2) another bullet entered at the top of theneck (rear) which exited in the front portionof the neck; and(3) another bullet entered at the bottom of theneck (rear) or high in the back which did notexit".(Hsca 18/1/78 interview)
Lipsey's drawing for the HSCA
Again we have a wound described at the level of the bottom of the ears (see his diagram, above, marked #2), well below the eop. (Lipsey even calls it 'the top of theneck'). He seems to have thought that this wound was not caused by the headshot bullet, yet again perhaps suggesting that there was no view that this 'top of the neck' 'hairline' wound was the entry point for the headshot until after the autopsy was over.
HSCA INTERVIEW WITH RICHARD LIPSEY, 1-18-78
[NOTE: This transcript was created by Debra Conway of JFK Lancer Productions
and Publications.]
Q: To follow that up, as you should well know because I take it you do hunt a lot, locating wounds in hair is very difficult. The sighting. Did you visibly see the wounds in the back of the head, what you feel were the entrance wounds? Was based on what the doctors stated that we know their opinions…
[Lipsey is interrupting with "No…That's…No."]
LIPSEY: No. That’s...No. I hope I’m not contradicting myself. But at this point, there again, like I said, it's been a long time. I feel that there was no really entrance wound --maybe I said that --in the rear of his head. There was a point where they determined the bullet entered the back of his head but I believe all of that part of his head was blown. I mean I think it just physically blew away that part of his head. You know, just like a strip right across there or may have been just in that area -- just blew it out..
Q: So you say the damage caused by the entrance and the exit of the bullet to the head caused one large hole?
LIPSEY: To the best of my recollection, yes it did. But one, the other one went in the back of the neck. Like a say, I saw the blood spots and what have you, but they weren't tremendous, not a blow-a-way like this. But, of course, what little I know about it, which isn't a hell of a lot, your bone is right there, so when it hit it, the bullet probably expanded, hit something solid and ripped. But here, it went in to tissue before it hit anything.....
" Lipsey also identified the entrance in the lower head as being just inside the hairline." (HSCA contact report, summary)
(Karnei was the resident pathologist who would ordinarily have performed the autopsy)
"President’s head wound(s): Dr. Kamei emphasized that he did not participate in the autopsy proper,
nor did he look inside the cranium. However, he did remember seeing one wound in the right side of the head approximately above the right ear, and another wound in the posterior skull, up high in the back of
the head, either in the center, or just left of center (which he associated in his mind with a right-front to
left-rear trajectory, or vice-versa). He also said that the upper posterior skull sagged a bit; i.e., was a bit
concave in shape." (Karnei, ARRB interview)
Karnei too appears unaware of any distinct entry wound to the head being found.
"In a different context, Dr. Kamei talked about photography in general by saying --
that it was controlled by “the people controlling the autopsy.” When asked what this meant, he replied that
the FBI and Secret Service (and then clarified that he meant Federal Agents in civilian clothes) were
“controlling everything to do with pictures,” including confiscation of all photographic and X-Ray film,
including unexposed X-Ray films, and unexposed (and unopened) rolls of photographic film. He said that
this control was so tight that he was surprised that the prosectors were allowed to take their notes with
them when they left the room after the autopsy." (ditto)
The above is interesting in the light of the apparent disappearence of Finck's (& also possibly Humes's) autopsy notes.
"It appeared that the bullet hit low in the occiput of the back of the head and entered the skull there and then traversed a portion of the brain and then hit the inside of the top of the skull toward the rear also and blew a good portion of that part of his skull right out
I asked: "Did you actually see the little entry at the bottom of the back of the head?"
"Couldn't see the entry," be replied. "That tissue was all pretty much blown away. . . ." I gathered that Osborne based his conclusion that the bullet struck from the rear on an interpretation of where it hit the inside of the skull on the way out I asked him how the bullet could enter from the rear and blow out the rear of the head. He said: ". . . he had to be leaning forward, and the bullet had to hit him in the lower-right behind, you know, that little lump in the back of your head there Osborne was referring to the external occipital protuberance, where Hurnes said there was an entrance wound. Again, I asked Admiral Osborne if he saw that wound. He replied: "Well, the pieces were all blown apart, so it didn't make one tiny little hole in the bone-no. . . . it blew that portion of the skull into several pieces.
L1FTON: I see. So you didn't actually see an entry wound, per se, but it's inferred that it was somewhere towards the bottom of that big hole-or something like that?
OSBORNE: It had to be. Otherwise it couldn't have hit the inside of the skull where it did."
(Lifton, "Best Evidence", pbk,656-657)
I can find no relevant comments from any of the following (who have been interviewed)
Adm. Burkley
Adm. C. E. GALLOWAY
GODFREY McHUGH
Major General Philip WEHLE
Capt. JAMES H. STOVER
.... that mention any entry wounds to the head.
I am not aware of any interviews with these guys:
Dr. GEORGE BAKEMAN (? he's on the FBI list but may not exist... : )
JOHN VAN HOESEN
EDWIN STROBLE
GREGG CROSS
This covers (so far as I'm aware) everyone who was present in the morgue
during, or during part of, the autopsy.
If anyone knows of any omissions or errors, please let me know.
mailto:paulseaton@breathemail.net
The conflicting geography of the supposed 'eop' entry wound.
It is essential to distinguish between two anatomic points. one : the point in the scalp at which the 6 x 15mm 'lacerated' & 'tangential' scalp tear was found & two : the point in the skull where a 'portion' of a so-called entry wound was found. By common consent (Humes, Boswell, Finck, Kellerman, Stringer, Lipsey* - literally all those who seem to have been aware of it ) it appears that the so called 'entry wound' in the scalp was very little above the rear hairline. The supposedly 'corresponding' skull wound was located some 2" higher - making the notion that the two 'objects' were both part of the same bullet entry that much more difficult to believe.**
It is possible that both the small scalp laceration and the 'portion' of bevelled bone were merely by products
of the explosive injury to the head, and of no great significance. In the same way that the autopsy report was
later rewritten to include the throat wound (which the doctors were entirely unaware of at the time of the autopsy),
I believe it is likely that the interpretation of these two 'wounds' at the back of the head as 'proof' of an entry
wound there was an (erroneous) conclusion reached - without benefit of the autopsy photographs & x-rays - long
after the autopsy was over.
*Lipsey even calls it a 'neck' wound.
**It should be noted that it is irrelevant to my argument whether or not the 'white mass' at the rear hairline (as seen in the colour autopsy photograph above) was actually a 'hole' or actually a random piece of tissue that happened to be lying on the scalp when the picture was taken. In either case the autopsists would appear convinced that the scalp 'entry' was this low on the head.
